As the American Civil Liberties Union was chastising the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) for having a million names on the No Fly Watch (or selectee) List, I was preparing for another business trip. The travel hassles have not changed since I found myself on the list in January of 2005. Airline boarding passes cannot be printed at home, no curb check of bags is allowed, airline kiosks send you to the ticket counter, and that's when the fun begins. Like everyone on the list, I present identification in several forms and then step to the side to wait as the airline employee calls Washington to get me clearance. When my boarding pass is finally printed, there is often a checkerboard along the bottom, which alerts TSA officials at security screening that I am to be given special attention.
Many friends and more politically active types than I can count believe I was placed on the "selectee" list as a consequence of writing Bush's Brain and The Architect, two books critical of the current administration and the president's political gun Karl Rove. Circumstance suggests they might be right. But I do not know. My second book, Bush's War for Reelection, was released during the fall 2004 campaign and broke the news regarding the president's incomplete National Guard records. CBS and other news organizations used much of that research to pursue the story further, though their efforts did not prevent Bush's second term. A few months later, when I went to the airport for a January 2005 business trip, I discovered I was on the list. (CNN's Drew Griffin, recently doing reports on incompetence regarding the terrorist lists, also reported he has been placed on the No Fly Watch List.)
While I have no doubt that Rove and numerous other bad actors in the administration would use the selectee list to harass their political enemies, I am more inclined to believe the problem is breath-taking incompetence and outdated technology. The TSA is trying to refute the ACLU's claims that a million names are on the list as of last week but their explanation only reveals the agency's failings. The Inspector General of the Justice Department said in September of 2007 that 700,000 names were on the watch list and 20,000 were being added per month, which led to the ACLU's figure of one million this month. (TSA says the 700,000 names were scrubbed and reduced by 50 percent but has not refuted the 20,000 new names per month.)
The 20,000 new names monthly are actually new "records," according to the TSA's own web site. "A new 'record' is created for every alias, date-of-birth, passport and other identifying information for watch listed suspects." In other words, Osama is on the list both by his known name and, most likely, its various derivatives like "Usama" and "Asama" even "Isamma." Each one of those represents what TSA refers to as a "record." Osama, of course, is not likely to travel under any alias even remotely close to his name, nor is any other terrorist, but their aliases are a part of why there are one million records on the list. In fact, if the TSA's numbers are accurate and there are only 400,000 people on the Consolidated Terror Watch List then there are 600,000 "records" of aliases and variations on passport numbers, addresses, dates of birth, and other identifying data, which increases the probability that innocent Americans are matched with terrorist suspects.
The TSA has kept a defensive posture by arguing that 95 percent of the names on its lists are terrorists and are not in the U.S. But who can believe such an assertion? Isn't any determined terrorist going to know their name is on the list and either not travel or come up with a clever alias? This, therefore, begs the next logical question of who, exactly, is TSA trying to keep from flying and why?
Me, of course. And Drew Griffin of CNN. And David Nelson, (son of Ozzie and Harriet of 60s TV fame.) And Nobel Peace Prize Winner Nelson Mandela. And Major General Vernon Lewis, who holds the Army's Distinguished Service Medal and has a top secret security clearance. And Marine Staff Sgt. Daniel Brown who flew home from combat duty in Iraq to discover he was not able to board a flight in the country he had just served. And six year-old John William Anderson, who was born on the Fourth of July and was stopped by airport security enroute to Disney World. And the list goes on and on and on and on.
TSA claims that of the 400,000 names on the Consolidated Terror Watch List, two small subsets (No Fly Watch and No Fly lists) of 50,000 people are "reserved for known or suspected terrorists that reach a threshold where they should not be allowed to fly, or should get additional scrutiny." Everyone I named above is included in that category. Few of us, I suspect, would complain about the inconvenience if we thought our inclusion was making the country safer but there is no record of the TSA's data every playing a role in the capture of a terrorist.
The most maddening part of all of this is that there seems to be little any of us can do to extricate ourselves from the list. No matter how many times you prove you are an American citizen, have no arrest record, pay your taxes, get a lump in your throat when you see Old Glory, you still don't get off the list and you have to prove your citizenship and identity every time you return to the airport. TSA established the Travelers' Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP) to allow people like me to input data and seek removal from the list but you are never informed of their decision or how it was reached. Filing a lawsuit to appeal has resulted in plaintiffs being told information they seek for justice cannot be delivered for reasons of national security, which is why they were put on the list in the first place. (This is not circular logic; this is hilarity.)
The Washington Post reported last year that the name matching technology being used by the TSA was based on Soundex, an algorithm developed in 1918 to parse U.S. census data. Soundex removes vowels from names and assigns a numerical value to remaining consonants. The result is hundreds of "false positive" matches and unnecessary inconvenience for tens of thousands of airline passengers. Using Soundex, Barack Obama's name, for instance, shows a match with someone named Brisco O'Finn, who sounds like an IRA terrorist in a Tom Clancy novel.
In an attempt to acquire some public confidence, the TSA launched a new system called Secure Flight. An analysis of the system findings by at least one technology company, however, indicates Secure Flight did nothing more than use a process known as "look up." This is rules-based software that tells a computer that Bob = Robert = Rob = Bobby. Rules-based matching brought the TSA completely up to date with............1970. This, obviously, offers some clues as to why so many innocent people with common names are detained at airports. Using extensive human resources to process all of these victims of "false positive" matches means there is less chance that a potential terrorist will be caught trying to board a flight. Secure Flight tried to improve the system by using private data, which ultimately drew resistance. Although private data might have stopped more suspects, it is silly to think the TSA would have overlooked all of the false positive matches turned up by Soundex and "look up" just to concentrate on what they found using private data.
Not surprisingly, Secure Flight was a disaster and resolved nothing. TSA knows there is a more advanced approach available for dealing with data but if they are using it for their launch of the new and allegedly improved Secure Flight II, they are not saying. Because I have an interest in this issue, I know that a company I have worked with, S3 Matching Technologies of Austin, Texas, demonstrated a sophisticated algorithmic-scoring technology to TSA and got no response. Algorithmic scoring, which rates matches on their probability of being correct, can eliminate more than 95 percent of all "false positive" matches. Algorithmic scoring is about as close as you can come to getting a computer to think for you.
Although S3 uses its technology to run two of the largest business telecom networks in the world and process a billion NYSE and NASDAQ transactions on a daily basis for many of the country's most recognizable financial services companies, TSA expressed no interest in their product. A number of data quality companies like Trillium, Dataflux, IBM's Ascential, and Business Objects offer products that can improve the data quality at TSA, and it is possible TSA has quietly signed a contract with one of them but it is equally likely that TSA has chosen nothing more than an improved version of a rules-based matching engine, instead of the more effective algorithmic scoring system.
What's going on here? If the TSA can fix the list with better technology, why doesn't that happen? Isn't it possible that the larger list allows the federal government to monitor the travel of non-terrorist and politically vocal Americans with the same impunity demonstrated by the unconstitutional tapping of our phones?
Even if there were an improvement in the data matching technology for TSA and other federal agencies, there are issues regarding the quality of the source data. In the TSA's case, data comes from the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), which is operated by the FBI. A GAO report in 2004 indicated that the TSC used data from 12 governmental lists to build the No Fly List and the No Fly Watch (Selectee) Lists. Even FBI agents, however, have complained about their quality. In an email obtained by the ACLU through a Freedom of Information request, one agent, critical of the TSA's rationale, wrote, "Unfortunately, egg headed thinking like this muddies the waters to the point where the no-fly list and selectee lists become virtually worthless (garbage in, garbage out)." Another agent sent a colleague a note that said, "These lists are not comprehensive and not centralized. Some subjects appear on one list but not the others. Some of the lists are old and not current. We are really confused."
This seems to be a problem that is rampant within our government. While major corporations deal with massive amounts of data on a daily basis with the latest technology, the federal government, which is charged with protecting our borders and our society's most critical institutions, does not appear to know how to maintain data quality and is consistently overwhelmed by digital information. NBC News recently reported U.S. government statistics that taxpayers are defrauded out of about $60 billion annually in Medicaid and Medicare payments to bogus providers. In spite of the fact that we spend billions annually on a questionable war, we leave federal employees trying to match millions of names and doctor and provider IDs using simple EXCEL or MS ACCESS data sheets. A bit of money invested in advanced matching technology would reduce these figures dramatically. Taxpayers deserve to have the latest technology protecting their money the same way it does investors in private businesses.
Unfortunately, Washington has been slow to adapt. Just last week the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) acknowledged paying out $92 million over six years to providers who used the IDs of dead doctors to file claims. CMS had promised six years ago to end the problem but only recently came up with a new identification and matching system. CMS told a Senate Homeland Security subcommittee that it will now run matches on doctor and provider IDs every 90 days to make sure fraud is eliminated. Undoubtedly, there was no one on the committee aware of the fact that systems exist to run advanced matching technology on a daily basis, which could eliminate the chance of fraud that exists in that 90 day window. Saving $92 million out of the $60 billion estimated in annual fraud was characterized by one critic, however, as a bit like "running into a burning house and grabbing the silverware."
Imagine, therefore, the depth and the breadth of bad data in the government's largest database of all.....Social Security. The Social Security Administration's Inspector General has reported that there are about 18 million "inconsistencies" in that database. While the IG report was generally complimentary of the agency's maintenance of an overall quality database for 435 million Social Security numbers, it pointed out that the bad data present on the list is likely to mean problems for legal workers and U.S. citizens trying to get hired using the new E-Verify system established to prevent employers from giving jobs to undocumented workers. Indeed, among the businesses presently using E-Verify, thousands have reported that legal workers have been given "no match" (meaning you get no job) letters from Social Security, undoubtedly, as a consequence of bad data. All of this, of course, leads to the recurring question of why doesn't Social Security, the largest repository of data our government is likely to have, use contemporary technology to cleanse, merge, and update data on a daily basis to get rid of the inconsistencies? The agency's present data conditions reveal a level of performance that offers evidence of outdated software.
When the next president takes office, among the items at the top of his list ought to be a mandate to deliver a little advanced technology to the federal government to protect the taxpayers from further waste.
As for me, I need to stop criticizing or I'm never going to get off the No Fly Watch List.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
the neocons have been successful getting everything they want, especially from an unusually docile and compliant Democratic Party.
They may look incompetent, but what they really are is successful.
OK..so, TSA is slow and stupid, we all know that. But to me the real question is "who, besides TSA thinks that any terrorist anywhere still believes that they can hijack a plane anymore?" At one time hijacking a plane almost made sense, but now, even if the plane were a chartered flight of nuns on the trip to the holy land, if a terrorist told everyone to be seated and remain calm and that they'd be alright, I suspect even the meekest among us would rise up enmasse and rend any and all wouldbe hijackers limb from limb. The days of hijackers thinking the passengers would shrink back to save themselves is obsolete.
TSA as does most of Homeland Security is a creation to translate fear into obedience and we all know the primary antidote for fear is understanding...and that evidently is on the "no fly" list too.
Remember that the government's recent attempts to update databases at the FBI ended up as an expensive failure, due somewhat to their hiring of contractors to design them a brand-new specially tailored super-duper database. Mr. Moore mentions a few examples of technologies already in existence and in use in the real world which could be used for data problems at TSA and elsewhere; funding for updates should probably come with requirements to design solutions which start with existing technologies, open to actual bidding by competent firms (not Halliburton, KBR, or any of the usual suspects). Substantial customization is to be anticipated, but people have got to get real in their expectations and get it online before it's obsolete.
My personal take on the "No Fly" lists is that they don't WANT to improve it because that would take control of the data out of the hands of partisan policy wonks who have no qualms about using the government's national security instruments to carry out personal vendettas and to harrass political opponents. It's an Excel spreadsheet on Cheney's laptop, and that's the way he wants it.
...on the other hand, here's an interesting article in Salon which says the NSA and other agencies have access to a really massive amount of data and very impressive software to mine it all:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/07/23/new_churchcomm/index.html
That would suggest that the apparent incompetence is in fact intentional and highly selective. How sad for that conclusion to be not shocking in the least.
As mush as you and I and this guy over there would like to think that there is some nefarious plan in place to subject regular Americans to the indencency of being on the "No Fly List", I think the author of this article points out that this may not be the case. If the TSA were actually capable of pulling this off, then why all the mistakes? While some prominent people may have been man handled by the TSA, I bet dollars to donuts, that a whole lot more regular people are harassed on daily basis. Some of it is for sure the tech the government is using. Anyone who been to any government office can attest to still seeing monochrome screens and dot matrix printers. Problem is, government isn't a business. So unlike a corporation who can squeeze and few shareholders or downsize or whatever it takes to become competitive, government has no such luxury. Cuz you know what that means. Higher taxes. Revamping a system decades old with who knows how many different systems would take a massive amount of money and time. Do you want to pay for it? I know I'm willing to throw some money in the pot, but I sincerely doubt most of America would agree.
Somewhere I have a reference for this: incompletence in preparing the procedures. Every name on the list is placed there by an agent of one of three agencies filing a form. The only way for a name to be removed from the list is for that same agent to file another form. But there is no way to get to the agent starting from a name on the TSA list. The agents themselves are probably not required to keep a record of names they submitted either, but I have no confirmation for that.
Quite how they expected this to work is beyond me. Apparently, also beyond them.
The no fly list is just another particle in the massive cultural conditioning experiment. If I were a 'terrorist' and knew that the list existed and that I was likely on it, I'd change my damn name. An FBI flunky related to the no fly list was on CSPAN with Greta this morning, and his mission was to help continue and further the cultural conditoning effort. For example, he said, in response to a question about the budget for his ops, that it is a matter of top secret security and he can't reveal his budget.... or WHAT? WHY THE HELL NOT? How could knowing how much or how little he has to spend on keeping us on pins and needles would possibly damage our "security"? That ain't it. He has to maintain the shroud of secrecy and sobriety so that we will be tamed and made to accept the unconstitutional removal of our Constitution and its protections for us FROM OUR GOVERNMENT. Give me the first and fourth amendments anyday, in return for open borders and REAL defenders at the borders who might be able to spot someone, other than We The People, needing law enforcement's attention. Read Chalmers Johnson, and start to worry and doubt your, well, "their" government, if you don't already.
by the way, if anyone reading this blog thread has not read BUSH's Brain, or Boy Genius or THE ARCHITECT, you need to, and then send it to your congressperson with a note saying INHERENT CONTEMPT, JAIL KARL ROVE!!!!
John McCain's Agenda:
http://mccainsource.com/corruption?id=0022
And the state of our economy:
http://mwhodges.home.att.net/
MR. MOORE,
I loved your book about Rove, the antiAmerican.
if you are reading this, may I suggest you make a tshirt that reads, "ME AND A MILLION OTHERS ARE ON THE NO FLY LIST.
on back have printed "PRACTING DISSENT, AN AMERICAN TRADITION SINCE 1776"
and like the Dutch who all wore armbands as jewish and non jewish people during Hitler's round up, Sell them on line and at airports everywhere.
The whole world will flock to buy them, in support of freedoms. let everyone wear them when they fly,and no cool person would fly without their Tshirt. (Copyright yours, from me to you.)
If you register to vote (as a Democrat)
that is enough reason to be on the list.
Know that you are in good company.
If we are able to elect a responsible individual as
President; the list will become smaller, and mean something.
All it means now is to be on the blue team.
If Mr. Moore had not written books critical of the Bush administration he probably wouldn't be having these problems, now would he? The best thing to do when dealing with dictators-in-training is to clam up. Look what happened to Solzhenitsyn.
Mr Moore has nobody to blame but himself ...and Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton for egging him on.
don't worry about the no fly list. its not aimed at you its aimed at american youth like the kid going to disney world. by the time he is an adult the acceptance of people control measures like the list, like free speech zones, like unauthorized surveillance, like punishing people who disagree with the gov't, like a lap dog press spreading obvious falshoods and logic twisting spin to support gov't over reach will be gladly accepted because they will have known nothing else.
Our government needs to be overhauled. It's broken, plain and simple.
No incompetence here, - this was a carefully orchestraded (and often violent -> http://www.consortiumnews.com/2008/030908a.html) attack on the working-class in America and all over the globe that has been orchestrated since the 1960s.
The "war on terror" is really a war on anyone rejecting predatory unchecked-capitalism. Regardless of his violent actions - if Bin Laden were a Western banker-friendly corporatist cheering slave-labor, he'd now be a "Senior Fellow" in AEI, Heritage or some other Neoliberal "Think(??) Tank"
The Neoliberal establishment is establishing a global slave-labor trade mechanism and they will invade, bomb, occupy and isolate any sovereign country, leader or other obstacle that gets in their way. Neoliberals (neocon and Democrat "Free Trade" crusaders) are the enemy of free people, not Muslims or South American revolutionaries.
This is nothing short of intentional global povericide, don't confuse this with "incompetence".
What appears to be a bumbling buffoon is truly a decoy of sheer brilliance and precisely the orchestration of Rove and Cheney in commandeering the 2000 election ... before our very eyes. Everything they have subsequently proceeded to do in systematically destroying our constitutional rights has been done very publicly.
Where do we begin to congregate and say no more? People have "hope" that our rights will be restored in this next election ... but they have gone so far in robbing us, do you really believe our liberties will be restored? Eavesdropping, cameras everywhere, no-fly lists, lists for attending peace rallies, Blackwater Militia patrolling us - with guns, hand appointed federal attorneys and judges, FEMA camps built to imprison within, ...
7 Los Angeles bomb squad units recently came to our sleepy enclave in West Los Angeles to apprehend two thirteen year old boys who used a plastic water bottle, rubbing alcohol and chlorine tabs for a pool to make a large boom in what was once labeled as childish pranks. Any sort of "explosive" device will now bring you an arrest record, felony and an army of bomb squad units. Read about it at www.theheartofthematter.typedpad.com
This is the America we now have ... where do we congregate to reclaim our liberties?
Airports: Hell on Earth.
David Brooks spoke frankly about the presidential and...
Joe Biden lashed out at Sarah Palin on Wednesday, calling her recent rhetoric...
GREENVILLE, N.C. — After weeks of limited contact with the news media, Republican...
Everyone knows about the dreaded Bradley Effect: the phenomenon that leaves...
Inside the Obama campaign, almost without...
In presidential elections, winning and losing results...
The New York Times harshly criticized the McCain-Palin...
Madonna went on VP candidate "Sarah fucking Paling" at her Madison Square Garden show Monday...
Jim VandeHei and John Harris of The Politico have gone and decreed last night's debate "The worst...
In the past week of campaigning, Sarah Palin's famous...
The view from a hovering...
NEW YORK — A stock market empowered by an emergency interest rate cut...
The newest issue of Men's Health has what is sure to be an illuminating...
Loading comments…
Posted July 21, 2008 | 04:52 PM (EST)